Subscribe to MRZine
PARAMILITARISM AND THE ASSAULT ON DEMOCRACY IN HAITI by Jeb Sprague
GLOBAL NATO AND THE CATASTROPHIC FAILURE IN LIBYA by Horace Campbell
THE ECONOMIC WAR AGAINST CUBA: A Historical and Legal Perspective on the U.S. Blockade by Salim Lamrani
ARY DOCTORS: How Venezuela and Cuba Are Changing the World's Conception of Health Care by Steve Brouwer
ING THE VENEZUELAN REVOLUTION: Hugo Chavez Talks to Marta Harnecker by Hugo Chavez and Marta Harnecker
TIONS OF "REAL SOCIALISM": The Conductor and the Conducted by Michael A. Lebowitz
THE SOCIALIST ALTERNATIVE by Michael A. Lebowitz
BUILD IT NOW: Socialism for the Twenty-First Century by Michael A. Lebowitz
BEYOND CAPITAL: Toward a Theory of Transition by István Mészáros
|National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in Venezuela
by Kim Scipes
As protests have been taking place in Venezuela for the last couple of weeks, it is good to check on the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the US Empire's "stealth" destabilizer. What has the NED been up to in Venezuela?
Before going into details, it is important to note what the NED is and is not. First of all, it has nothing to do with the democracy we are taught in civics classes, concerning one person one vote, everyone affected having a say in the decision, etc. (which is commonly known as "popular" or grassroots democracy). The NED opposes this kind of democracy.
The NED promotes top-down, elite, constrained (or "polyarchal") democracy. This is the democracy where the elites get to decide the candidates or questions suitable to go before the people -- always limiting the choices to what the elites are comfortable with. Only after the elites have made their decision are the people presented with the "choice" that the elites approve. And the NED prattles on with its nonsense about how it is "promoting democracy around the world."
The other thing to note about the NED is that it is not independent as it claims, ad nauseum. It was created by the US Congress, signed into US law by President Ronald Reagan (that staunch defender of democracy), and it operates from funds provided annually by the US Government.
Its Board of Directors is drawn from among the elites in the US Government's foreign policy-making realm. Past Board members have included Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Frank Carlucci, General Wesley K. Clark, and Paul Wolfowitz. Today's board can be found at www.ned.org/about/board; most notable is Elliot Abrams of Reagan Administration fame.
In reality, the NED is part of the US Empire's tools, and "independent" only in the sense that no elected presidential administration can directly alter its composition or activities, even if it wanted to. It's initial project director, Professor Allen Weinstein of Georgetown University, admitted in the Washington Post of September 22, 1991, that "a lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA."
In other words, according to Professor William Robinson in his 1996 book Promoting Polyarchy, the NED is a product of US foreign policy shift from "earlier strategies to contain social and political mobilization through a focus on control of the state and governmental apparatus" to a process of "democracy promotion," whereby "the United States and local elites thoroughly penetrate civil society, and from therein, assure control over popular mobilization and mass movements." What this means is, as I note in my 2010 book AFL-CIO's Secret War Against Developing Country Workers: Solidarity or Sabotage?:
Obviously, this also means that these "civil society" organizations can be used offensively as well, against any government the US opposes. NED funding, for example, was used in all of the "color revolutions" in Eastern Europe and, I expect, is currently being put to use in the Ukraine as well as elsewhere.
How do they operate? They have four "institutes" through which they work: the International Republican Institute (currently headed by US Senator John McCain), the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (currently headed by former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright), the Center for International Private Enterprise (the international wing of the US Chamber of Commerce), and the American Center for International Labor Solidarity (ACILS), the foreign policy operation of the AFL-CIO, with Richard Trumka the head of its Board of Directors.
As I documented in my book, the ACILS had been indirectly involved in the 2002 coup attempt in Venezuela, by participating beforehand in meetings with leaders later involved in the coup, and then denying afterwards the involvement of the leaders of the right-wing labor organization (CTV) in the coup, leaders of an organization long affiliated with the AFL-CIO. We also know the NED overall had been active in Venezuela since 1997.
The NED and its institutes continue to actively fund projects in Venezuela today. From the 2012 NED Annual Report (the latest available), we see they have provided $1,338,331 to organizations and projects in Venezuela that year alone: $120,125 for projects for "accountability"; $470,870 for "civic education"; $96,400 for "democratic ideas and values"; $105,000 for "freedom of information"; $92,265 for "human rights"; $216,063 for "political processes"; $34,962 for "rule of law"; $45,000 for "strengthening political institutions"; and $153,646 for Center for International Private Enterprise.
Additionally, however, as found on its "Latin America and Caribbean Regional" page, the NED has granted $465,000 to the ACILS to advance NED objectives of "freedom of association" in the region, with another $380,000 dedicated to Venezuela and Colombia. All this is in addition to yet another $645,000 to the International Republican Institute and $750,000 to the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.
The irony of these pious claims for promoting "freedom of association," etc. is that Venezuela is a country that has already developed public participation to one of the highest levels in the world and that also has one of the freest media in the world. Even with massive private TV media involvement in the 2002 coup, the government did not take away their right to broadcast afterward.
In other words, the NED and its institutes are not active in Venezuela to help promote democracy, as they claim, but in fact, to act against popular democracy in an effort to restore the rule of the elite, top-down democracy. They want to take popular democracy away from those nasty Chavistas and show who is boss in the US Empire. This author bets they fail.
Kim Scipes, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Sociology at Purdue University North Central in Westville, IN, and is author of AFL-CIO's Secret War Against Developing Country Workers: Solidarity or Sabotage? . He can be reached through his web site at faculty.pnc.edu/kscipes.